1 / 15

Impact of the cohesion policy on the level and quality of employment in Poland

Impact of the cohesion policy on the level and quality of employment in Poland. Project co-financed from financial means of the European Union within the Operational Programme Technical Assistance. General objective.

brock
Download Presentation

Impact of the cohesion policy on the level and quality of employment in Poland

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Impact of the cohesion policy on the level and quality of employment in Poland Projectco-financed from financial means of the European Union within the Operational Programme Technical Assistance

  2. General objective • Analysis and assessment of the impact of interventionsco-financed from the European Union structural funds within the cohesion policy on the level and quality of employment with regard to requirements of a knowledge-based economy.

  3. Countingjobs • Jobscreated– newjobsthatarecreated by Structural Fund interventionwithin threeyears of thecompletion of works. Thesemay be temporaryor permanent. • Joblesswho obtained employment as a result of an intervention – number of beneficiaries that have found employment within some time after the completion of the intervention. • Jobs maintained– existing jobs that are at risk and would be lost without Structural Fund intervention. • Employees who increased their qualifications as a result of an intervention (“number of improved jobs”)– people that benefited from the interventions and upgrades their qualifications leading to better quality of jobs they undertake.

  4. Geographicalcoverage • Researchis a part of an international project which will be implemented in four states of the VisegradGroup: • the Czech Republic • Poland • Slovakia • Hungary

  5. Overall researchapproach • Top-down–analyzingmacroeconomic data (mainly public statistics and LFS data) and applying econometric methods • Bottom-up – analyzingdetailed data obtainedfrom beneficiaries of EU funds and properly selected control groups as well as monitoring data

  6. Top down approach • Includes all interventions co-financed from the financial means of the European Social Fund, European Regional Development Fund and Cohesion Fund within operational programmes provided in the National Development Plan for 2004-2006. The analysis will cover expenditures incurred as of 31 December 2008 on the basis of data from the annual reports.

  7. Top-down approach– data source: • EFS, ERDF, Cohesion Fund expeditures (as of 31 Dec 2008) • The Labour Force Survey (LFS) • Results of macro-modelsapplied in Poland: • HERMIN, • MaMoR3 (computable general equilibrium model, CGE) • EUImpactModII (dynamicstochastic general equilibrium, DSGE)

  8. Bottom-upapproach • Includes only selected interventions targeted at: • enterprises (ERDF) – code of intervention:152, 161,162, 163, 321, 322, 324 • education and trainings of employees (ESF) – code of intervention 24 • education and trainings of jobless (ESF) – code of intervention 21

  9. Bottom-upapproach- methodology • Primary data: • CAPI survey of entrepreneurs: • 700 interviews with entrepreneurs who benefited from ERDF • 700 interviews with entrepreneurs who did not benefit from Structural Funds • 150 interviews with entrepreneurs who unsuccessfully applied for EU support • CATI survey of employees who participated in a training financed from ESF • PSM (support for jobless) 96 public employment services– PULS databases in district(powiat) jobcentres • Case studies (best practice) • Expert panel • Secondary data: • The evaluation reports already available • The annual reports • Follow-up surveys of Programme leavers

  10. Joblesswho obtained employment as a result of an intervention (gross effect) • SOP HRD (ESF) • code of intervention: 21, 22, 25 Note: Data refer to survey of EuropeanSocial Fund leavers and SOP HRD 2008 annual report

  11. Employees who increased their qualifications as a result of an intervention • SOP HRD (ESF) • Code of intervention: 24 • Improved jobs: • People who use knowledge and qualifications acquired in EU funded projects in jobs they undertake. • People who … after the EU funded project: • changedtheirpositionto higheror • theirwageincreasedor • they received additionalfringe benefits (company car, private health insurance, credit or loan etc.) or • theirwork conditions improved(better equipment, safety work improved)

  12. Do youuseknowledgeaquiredin theEU funded project in yourjob? * Significance0.01

  13. Change in working conditions (wage, position, non-wage benefits) * * * Significance0,02-0.01

  14. Impact of project on changesinworking conditions (wage, position, fringe benefits)

  15. Projectco-financed from financial means of the European Union within the Operational Programme Technical Assistance

More Related